Yes, I am aware 140mm is a huge number, since most early war tanks were under 120mm thick on frontal armor and even less on the sides.
However, that is the actual penetration value that I can find online for Hafthohlladung mines from several sources. Sadly I don’t know the year they came intro production, but they were supposedly highly effective, albeit dangerous due to their nature of requiring direct proximity of the enemy tank.
They were apparently declared obsolete in May 1944 in favor of the Panzerfaust but existing stockpiles were still used
Judging from the penetration they have, I would say 1942-1943
I like your idea a lot, I mean current TNT pack probably penetrates 1000mm of armour. In Berlin I could just put it 2 meters away from the King Tiger and kill it in one blow
just to be more specific, and to show how darkflow considers the “balance”
for T34-85 there is also the D-5T which is weaker at 5.3.
For panthers, there is the D at 5.3, F at 5.7 and G at 6.0.
For tiger 2, there is 2P at 6.3, 2H at 6.7 and 2H SLA at 6.7.
For IS-2, there is the one at 5.7 and the 1944 at 6.3.
One could say EVERY MODEL in war thunder is confirmed, in that case.
Just my opinion but way too much focus on tanks. They’re a nice thing to have for sure but too many tanks will take away from this being an infantry game and turn it into war thunder
Enlisted is above all combined arms, imo.
Having more options for tanks could allow the tanks to be removed from campaign progression and put into the green upgrade trees for squads instead.
For example, for Moscow you could have a light tank, medium tank and tank destroyer squad each unlocked via the campaign, and those would have tank unlocks at like 10 squad upgrade points per tank or so, with for example the light tank squad having BT-7, T-60 or Pz38t, Pz2, the medium tanks having T-26, T-28 or Pz3, Pz4 and the TDs having ZiS-30 or Marder III
Does this mean there still is evidence of Panzer 3L being used in Moscow? What about the HEAT shells? I voted yes under the assumption that we have proof of both being used in the Moscow campaign.
I don’t know how you expect TDs to be halfway functional here. 4 functional tanks per nation per campaign is enough. Especially when they have to be balanced.
In Moscow, the TDs would offer longer, more powerful 75/76mm guns at the cost of protection compared to the medium tanks. They would offer one-shotting capabilities against basically any tank.
I would also consider using the stug 3A and T-26-4 for that squad to also offer a different option to the short 75/76mm gun mediums
Currently the lotto slot machine for AT soldiers and weapons is low as is the squads that even have AT soldiers. Adding a weaker AT grenade could help but I just currently dont see the need for 10000 different tanks when theres other balance issues as is
I don’t want it to be war thunder with infantry, but I also don’t want this to be COD arcade.
Vehicles were an important part of ww2; too important, I’d say, to be left just as a side distraction in a game focused on realism.
importing tanks is done mostly by the artists, who have to model the sights etc after porting it from WT, and maybe one developer who configures the stuff, but presumably the artists know how to do that as that would basically be filling in some numbers and dragging some sliders around.
balance issues are entirely solved by developers and artists are not involved with those.
as a result, this would not get in the way of balance changes, only in the way of fixing the placeholder models in Normandy.
this change would not make tanks more common. It would merely make them more varied.